alt.war.civil.usa

On Sep 18, 2:21 pm, Stephen Graham wrote:
> HWAYNE wrote:
> > Interesting, you would phrase the issue as you have. The southern courts
> > usually made the presumption "once free, always free." The northern courts
> > usually made the presumption, "once slave, always slave."
>
> > Thus, to follow, your phrase. In a southern court, if the subject offered
> > evidence of his freedom, the claimant to the slave would have to prove the
> > slave status. In a northern court, the master would have to offer evidence
> > of the slave status, and then the claimant to freedom would have to prove
> > otherwise.
>
> This is non-responsive to the question posed.
>
> Let me restate it: why shouldn't someone presume that a black
> encountered in Pennsylvania is free unless they can prove otherwise?

Mr. Elliott apparently is unaware of the Fugitive Slave Law of 1850.
Blacks were brought before a commissioner, not a court.

Question: when it comes to Mr. Elliott's ignorance, what's more
impressive: its vastness or its depth?